12 Rural-Urban Fringe – Definition, Delimitation and structure

Dr.Azka Kamil

epgp books

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wehrwein, an American land economist was the first social scientist to define the rural-urban fringe. According to him, this is the “area of transition between well recognised urban land uses and the area devoted to agriculture”.

 

Rodehaver (1956) identified it loosely as an area in which land is utilised in an urban manner while at the same time certain attributes of rural are present. Rural-Urban fringe is a transitional zone as it has a presence of both rural and urban characteristics and social groups. The modern means of transport and communications, as well as frequent movement of people & goods are making the social attitudes between the two groups of rural and urban, practically much diffused. The Rural-Urban fringe is a zone or frontier of discontinuity between city and country in which rural and urban land use are fused. The internal structure of the fringe has too been described in several ways. Rememann (1960) called these the

 

“inner” and “outer” fringes respectively. McKain and Burnight (1953) used the terms “suburban” and “extended” while Myers and Beegle (1947) referred to the “true” and “potential” fringe. Russwurm (1973) identified four zones rather than two i.e. the suburban ring, urban fringe, urban shadow, and commuting shed. The fringe can be defined in relation to the city and exists in the agricultural hinterland where land use is changing. The city does not grow outwards in well-defined patterns, rather sprawls haphazardly, making rapid advances at one point, and hardly moving at all, at another, thereby resulting in incoherent landscape. The other characteristic is a wide mix of land uses, which ranges from a variety of commercial developments, including out-of-town shopping centres, to the city servicesand industries which are conveniently located at the margins (Sharma.,S.).Daniels (1999) stressed that this area is not country nor is it a city either. It has been characterized as “a hybrid region no longer remote and yet with a lower density of population and development than a city or suburb”. The “strips of urban and suburban fabric have extended into the countryside, creating anirregular settlement pattern; those patterns blur the distinction between rural, urban and suburban”. There are, however, some distinctions. Unlike in suburbs, the urban-rural fringe has a lower density and more primitive land-useplanning

 

     Furthermore, any new development is more noticeable in the fringe, and growth management challenges are much greater than in suburbs.R-U fringe lies beyond the city administrative limits.It is a wide rural area into which residential development is encroaching, and new industrial sites and, other urban uses are in the process of development, along its main lines of communication. The development is often clustered around existing villages and small towns. The urban/rural fringe is the extensive space between the open countryside and the built-up cities and suburbs. It marks the space in which the landscape is growing and changing gradually and continuously. The change and development are the resultof increasing population pressure and economic growth, which exerts from the suburbs. Such quickdevelopment allows rural lands to draw vitality from inner cities

 

Structure:

 

The rural-urban fringe lies between the continuous built-up area of a city and the urban shadow.It can be viewed as an area of invasion in which population density is increasing rapidly and land values are rising.

 

The fringe consists of inner fringe (also called urban fringe), which is characterised by, the land in a progressive stage of transition from rural to urban land use. The area is dotted with newer construction sites, which have been approved by the authority. The second area in the fringe is the outer fringe (also called rural fringe), which is an area, in which rural land use continues to dominate the landscape. Apart from this, there is infiltration by those urban land uses which consume too much land, for example construction of airports, sewage works etc. The fringe area tends to increase along transportation lines and between such routes, pure rural land may extend cityward. The inner zone of R-U fringe is in the advanced stage of transition from rural to urban land uses. The outer zone indicates towards gradual change in the process whereby city influences begins to appear. Beyond the outer zone is a diffused area where dispersal of some non-farm residences appears.

 

At the city margins everywhere, the fringes contain a wide mix of land uses. It ranges from a variety of commercial developments to the city services and industries. Some of the cities of the western world have their fringes turned into ‘unpleasant environment’ by noxious industrial units, junkyards, wholesale oil storage, sewage plants, and even cemeteries. Out-of-town shopping centres also form a part of the western cities’ fringes.

 

Most of the people prefer to settle in the fringe areas and their selection of the fringe space is an outcome of social, economic and political factors. These include lower property prices and taxes, desire for open space and a quality living environment. These elements have been categorized by Daniels as Push and Pull Factors:

 

Push Factorshave the effect of compelling people to leave urban areas. Such factors include higher property taxes in core areas, reduced level of services in core areas, perception of increasing levels of urban crime and restrictive regulations.

 

Pull Factorshave the effect of enticing people to rural areas. Such factors include quality of life, differential tax and subsidy treatment, subsidization of suburban infrastructure and services by regional and local governments, subsidies on energy, continued emphasis on road building and cheaper land.

 

The following points describe various Pull Factors that are the advantages of fringe over urban areas (NSCAD):

 

a) Wide and cheap land: Attractiveness of lower cost land; greater space availability, possibility for greater access to nature.

 

b) Access to road: Provincial roads are often paved and maintained by the provincial government; therefore residents are not directly responsible, for paying for such services, as snow removal, road construction and maintenance. Conversely, road repairs in urban areas are covered by, area tax rates, or costs are ‘hidden’ in the lot price, in new subdivisions.

 

Therefore, a settlement pattern establishes along provincially maintained roads.

 

c) Reduced taxes: Rural areas often enjoy lower property taxes. Residents do not have to pay for services that exist in cities, which are covered by tax dollars. Extra costs are saved on transit, sidewalks and street lighting (Battilana, 1997).

 

d) Quality of life: Urban dwellers who have grown tired of the noise, pollution and crime commonly associated with urban areas, may have a perception that the country side has clean air, open space, and a slower pace of living. Notably, however, many rural areas experience higher crime rates than in more urbanized areas(Battilana, 1997).

 

e) Limited regulation: People living in cities often express frustration with the many forms of regulation in city life, pertaining to any number of issues from noise to property maintenance. In rural areas, people feel free to live as they choose without fear of regulatory interference.

 

The service of low density population, is generally more expensive, than for compact settlement. As the dispersal of settlements increases,the utilities, sewers, roads, public transportation, recreation and similar services generally increase their cost per capita. Stress in built upon the existing organizational structure, to finance and manage, the expansion. Some farmers sell their land to middle-men or realtors while others continue to hold out for higher land prices, and examine the neighbouring land use change. With the increase in population density and heavy traffic, farming is frequently becoming more difficult and is pushed to less fertile land. The development of the fringe area may result in the lossof its semi-rural atmosphere.However, developments in fringe areas are required to create their own systems.There are also infrastructural concerns, specially pertaining to sewer system. They often use on-site septic systems. This practice allows for scattered development where the soil is suitably permeable and creates serious health and environment concerns.As most of the rural areas, use well systems, they face an increased risk of water contamination and other health hazards (Daniels, 1999).

 

The rural-urban fringe is the boundary zone outside the urban area proper, where rural and urban land uses intermix. It is an area of transition from agricultural and other rural land uses to urban use. Fringe area when located well within the urban sphere of influence is characterised by a wide variety of land use including dormitory settlements, housing middle- income commuters who work in the main urban area. With time the characteristics of the fringe change from largely rural to largely urban. Suburbanisation takes place at the urban boundary of rural-urban fringe.

 

Certain amount of problem may erupt from the competing land uses within this zone and the constant pressure for new development, even in areas that have green belt status or other forms of protection.

 

The nature of the rural-urban fringe is influenced by agricultural policy, regional planning, the urban economy and the agricultural economy. Baker et al have identified four types of fringe resulting from these influences:disturbed landscapes, neglected landscapes, simplified landscapes and valued landscapes.

 

Source: http://www.geocases.co.uk/sample/urban2.htm

 

The area is in an advanced stage of transition ‘from rural to urban uses’. Another aspect is of social change in attitudes of the people of the outer fringe. Although primarily attitudes were rural, now with the urbanization, city influences have begun to penetrate and social transformation takes place. The economic transformation in the area forms ‘an urban shadow’. It is in this region that agricultural land is being under impact of urban expansion and gradually transformed with time.

 

The rural- urban fringe involves groups. The agriculture group is composed of the farmers whose land is being purchased for the urban development. People who are using land for other than agricultural purposes as well as not establishing their urban land use in the city proper. The city is the hub of diverse interests and serves as a centre of communication, employment, business and public services. The potential of selling out to non-farm interests is present to the farmer. This helps them realise the value of land and also various prospect it can be put to, since they do not want to see the values of their properties deteriorated. Non-farm interests also depend upon the attitudes of the farmers.At times, the non-farm development may tend to limit the potential non-farm value of his property.

 

People come to reside in the fringe looking for the best of both urban and rural realities. They prefer the peaceful environment and slower pace of life that takes them away from the aggressive & competitive city life. They want to develop a connection with natural surroundings. The availability of large spaces has lot of potential for development. The incoming of people into the fringe often leads to conflict between newcomers and long-term residents, thereby creating controversies over new development. For example, new fringe residents may expect public services comparable to those in inner cities and suburbs, but do not want to pay taxes to develop such services. Long-term residents in the fringe are often divided into two camps: those who resist growth, and those who see growth as an economic opportunity. For example, older landowners whose land provides retirement security may wish to sell their property for a high price and thus may promote development. Others may view development as a threat to the rural features. (Daniels, 1999).

 

There is a constant change in the pattern of land occupations. Farms are small with intensive crop production. Residential expansion is rapid. Services and other public utility facilities are inadequate and speculative building is common.

 

The social characteristic reveals that newly built private housing in villages built by elite developers is often expensive. It’s usually noted, that these are bought by relatively high wage earners. Local people who have the first claim on public housing will be physically segregated from these new developments. The rural-urban fringe is often regarded as “Greenfield sites” which are favoured by large firm or organisation seeking location for new developments such as Head-quarters, offices, housing and industrial estate. Greenfield sites have advantages of being untouched sites, uncluttered by any previous development, and are normally available as extensive tracts, in a single property deal so facilitating land acquisition. It thereby becomes possible, to allocate land for schools, light industry and housing, so that there is functional as well as social segregation of land use. Also, the rural urban fringe attracts mobile middle class residents. One effect of their choosing to live beyond the city is that their financial contribution, in form of rates, is denied to the city, which they patronise for subsidised service such as public transport, social services and cultural amenities. Such dormitory dwellers, while retaining strong linkages with the city which provides them income, may opt out of the problem of urban change and decay. From the point of view of commuting, people living in the fringe areas commute daily to their place of work. This creates the dual problem of traffic congestion in the city and total inactivity during the day in dormitory villages. The city government is faced with the task of providing transport services capable of handling peak load. However, these services remain underutilised for the rest of the day.The service content of the fringe settlements becomes modified. They no longer have to carry an array of goods and services corresponding with the requirement of the population they serve. Rather they can focus on being specialised in particular direction.

 

 

      The occurrence of rural urban fringe in India is rather a recent phenomenon around the cities. It was non-existent even around the largest metropolitan cities in India before 1950 because of very slow growth of cities in that period. The cities first began to expand physically, first through the development of vacant land within the city itself and later by the slow encroachment on land in areas lying outside the city limits. The poorest sections stay in the villages around the city and commute to city for work. In India, urban fringe has become almost messy by joining of settlements. They inherit the evils of conurbations such as slums full of ‘jhuggi-jhonparis’, drainage-less unpaved narrow lanes and traffic congestion not far off the city centre. The delimitation of the R-U fringe involves its structural composition. It is composed of several attributes like city municipal limits, contiguous small urbanised towns, urbanised villages around the city, and also villages associated with the city by virtue of their other functions.

Source: Ramachandran, R. (2006)

 

During the British period, a number of villages around existing towns and cities were totally relocated or in some cases dislocated in order to obtain a space for the construction of new cantonment or civil lines. During the 19th century there was no real need for the physical expansion of towns and cities and in half of the twentieth century the increase in urban population was still marginal. The post-independence period has witnessed a radical transformation of the urban scene. Over the period of time, population of million cities increased by more than fifty per cent in a decade. Rapid growth of residential and other urban land uses occurred in a haphazard manner. Private land developers interested in making quick profits, industrial entrepreneurs and businessmen played a key role in bringing about the physical expansion of the city. The villages in the periphery of the city, which had hardly any administrative or political back up, were always an easy target. The physical expansion of the city brings with it changes in the social aspects of life in the fringe villages. The growth of industry, commerce, administration and institution of learning, arts, health generate jobs of an unskilled nature for rural population. For those who prefer to continue with farming, the rapidly growing city provides an expanding market for vegetables, fruit and milk. There becomes a significant change in the rural land uses and even in the attitudes and values of traditional rural people.

 

 

   Delimitation of the Rural-Urban fringe

 

The delimitation of the fringe zone ought to be based on field survey of all the villages within a radius of 10-20 km from a city, thereby including around 200 villages. For a proper demarcation of inner and outer boundaries of rural urban fringe, a field survey of all villages is necessary. A mere sample survey of villages is not adequate.

 

Most studies depend upon secondary data on revenue villages, particularly from Census of India. The city limits are invariably used as the inner limits of the fringe. An alternative method of finding the outer limits of the fringe zone is to use the median of the five variable boundaries.

 

The delineation of fringe zone using Census data can give us only approximate results which need to be supplemented by actual field studies. Also, the use of the limits of Standard Urban

 

Areas as the outer boundary of the rural-urban fringe may be used. The SUA were first defined in 1961 census and includes all villages around an urban place with population of 50,000 or more, which are expected to become part of the city in a period of two or three decades.

 

Structure of R-U fringe in India

 

The city and surrounding area comprise two types of administrative areas – municipal towns or nagarpanchayats and revenue villages or gram panchayats.

 

The municipal town tend to differ with distance from the main city. Near the main city, smaller municipal towns are part of the city and have no identity of their own. With distance from the main city the municipal towns are different as they have their own distinct identity. The area beyond the metropolitan built up area, but contiguous to it, having other municipal towns, census towns or fully urbanised villages constitutes the urban fringe part of the rural urban fringe. The urban fringe is very much like the proper city with residential and commercial centres, but it generally lacks city services such as piped water supply, sewerage and garbage disposal facilities. Layout is haphazard and chaotic, streets are narrow winding and poorly maintained and there is proliferation of squatter settlements and slums. In parts, the urban fringe is well organised, with posh residential colonies, or industrial townships whose access roads are well maintained and have all urban amenities.

 

The rural fringe that lies beyond the urban fringe consists of villages that are only partly affected by urbanisation. In some places, all the agricultural land is intact in other villages there are some isolated blocks of urban land use, as seen in the development of residential plots in patches along the main roads and scattered industrial establishments outside the village site. Sometimes, portion of agricultural land in village are acquired by real estate agents for speculative purposes, and these land remain vacant for long period of time. The rural fringe may contain small towns or number of well-established townships, which are designated as inner ring towns or suburbs. The rural villages are unaffected by the presence of the city mainly because of the greater distances separating them from area as the green belt. Some towns within the rural green belt area have fully developed industrial townships with residential areas, schools, hospitals and markets. These towns are ringed towns or satellite towns (Ramachandran, 2006).

 

     Stages of transformation of Fringe:

 

1. Rural stage:

  1. Characterises the villages which are yet untouched by the urban influence.
  2. Farming is the main occupation of the people.
  3. Village also comprise of landless labourers and artisans.
  4. Movement is restricted only to jobs in urban areas.

 

2. Linkage stage:

  1. With gradual spatial expansion of the city, walls of the close knit rural society gives way to city influence.
  2. Villages still retain rural character with respect to occupational structure, mobility.
  3. Farming transform from subsistence to commercial farming.
  4. Daily movement of villagers to city to sell vegetables, milk and flowers
  5. Improvement in amenities.

 

 

3. Occupational structure

  1. Younger generation develops closer ties with the city and some of the people leave the farming job for salaried or as low paid wage earners, repair shops.
  2.  Rest of the people engage in farming activity.
  3. Changing pattern of division of labour and mobility.
  4. Daily visits to city for job, domestic requirement, recreation, medical facilities.

 

4 Landuse change

  1. Village fully transforms to city life.
  2. Part or whole of the agricultural land acquired by the Government or by the private developers.
  3. Beginning of planned residential colonies in the village areas marks this stage.
  4. People involve mostly in non-farming activities.
  5. Significant improvements in transportation medium develops

 

5 Urban villages

  1. Entire village land is converted into urban land uses like residential and industrial.
  2. Sizeable section of the village population is comprised of migrants in search of job.
  3. People are engaged in low paid jobs, small business.

 

Problems of fringe areas:

 

Fringe sites are mostly used for dumping garbage and sewage of the city and for relocation of city’s slum. The fringe is a zone of haphazard industrial and residential development. This happens when the rural people lured by attractive prices sell their land to developers, who may not develop the land before they are sold and the people who purchase these lands have to wait for decades to obtain basic urban amenities. Another problem being speculation on land. Fringe areas lack most of civic services that are found in city like water supply, sewerage because the city provides these services only to place within the municipal limits. So they have to obtain water from hand pumps, tube wells, sceptic tanks and also adjust themselves to the poor quality of local medical educational, postal and transport facilities.

 

 

you can view video on Rural-Urban Fringe – Definition, Delimitation and structure

 

References

  1. Fesenmair,D., Goodechild, M., Morrison, S., (1979), The spatial structure of the rural– urban fringe: A multivariate approach, Canadian Geographer, Vol. XXIII, pg 255-265.
  2. NSCAD, (1997), Issues of Rural-Urban fringe, Sandy lake Community Research Group, Dalhousie University.
  3. Ramachandran, R., (2006), Urbanisation and urban systems in India, Oxford University Press.
  4. Sharma, S. in http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/geography/rural-urban-fringe-concept-meaning-and-characteristics-and-other-details/40076/
  5. Stephan, C. Smith, (1959), The Rural – Urban Fringe Problem, California Agriculture, Feb, pg2.
  6. http://www.geocases.co.uk/sample/urban3.htm